I don't think so; the urge to be published, even for nothing, is so strong (witness penny stock sites) amongst non-professional image makers that they might even get a larger base from which to draw material when some realise that it may be a route into publication.

Regarding the morality of the issue, that's a different thing altogether, and I think it disgraceful. But then, I have no Facebook, Twit or other such service to which I subscribe my presence. I would rather sell nothing at all than offer my goods or services at shitty prices, and the idea of being a willing rape is horrific to me.

This is a comment on that article. "I love Instagram and I have over 1700 photos on it, they are small images and I would not post anything i'd not want the world seeing as my account is public. I would feel rather proud if they used any of my photos! If you don't like it then leave Instagram :-)) Simple."

I am not worried so much about Instagram, I don't and will not use it. However, it's the precedent it sets.

For sake of argument, if the Instagram policy holds, what other photo sharing websites will claim the same thing down the road? Notice there is no "opt out" unless you delete your entire library. even there, I am not 100% certain. Usually those End Users agreements you have to click on are pages and pages long, so maybe the web site has a backup copy of your images they can some day use?

Call me paranoid or an idiot for thinking so, I've been called much wosre in the past I don't care, it's just establishing a precedent that others may follow that in the long run, bothers me.

I am not worried so much about Instagram, I don't and will not use it. However, it's the precedent it sets.

For sake of argument, if the Instagram policy holds, what other photo sharing websites will claim the same thing down the road? Notice there is no "opt out" unless you delete your entire library. even there, I am not 100% certain. Usually those End Users agreements you have to click on are pages and pages long, so maybe the web site has a backup copy of your images they can some day use?

Call me paranoid or an idiot for thinking so, I've been called much wosre in the past I don't care, it's just establishing a precedent that others may follow that in the long run, bothers me.

joe

People should probably keep a close eye on who Instagram buys out in the future. The interweb seems to love consolidation, so if it buys out the sites where your pics reside, that is also a risk it seems to me.

This is a comment on that article. .... I would feel rather proud if they used any of my photos!..."

What people who say this usually haven't considered is who "they" are. Will they still be so proud if their images get sold to and used to promote a company or cause they disagree with ?I know a couple of Intagram users who would be appalled if they found their images were going to be used to promote an organisation that supported vivisection, others that would hate their images to be used by certain political parties.

I'm just echoing other views, but Instagram is and always has been a business. They have to make profits, especially now that Facebook owns them. They have shareholders to satisfy.

Yes there are more legitimate users, but National Geographic and other similar companies use Instagram as a marketing tool to connect with users of that demographic. I would not think they are concerned with this change in ToS. If they are, they probably have left already.

Given the other options they have, this is the least intrusive to the users.

This is a comment on that article. "I love Instagram and I have over 1700 photos on it, they are small images and I would not post anything i'd not want the world seeing as my account is public. I would feel rather proud if they used any of my photos! If you don't like it then leave Instagram :-)) Simple."

Says it all really..

I was just about to post that, with exactly the same comment. The infinite monkey paradigm will lead to one or two good images being found among the staggering quantities of dross; but would the effort prove financially worthwhile?

Given the other options they have, this is the least intrusive to the users.

Indeed, burying right grabs in T&Cs is 'unintrusive'. It's also not very fair.

I fully appreciate that services like this have to be funded somehow, but there must be less surreptitious ways of doing it.The Flickr model, so many free then pay a subscription could be an option. Charging a modest subscription for the app or a micro payment per upload could also work. If they really feel there's enough revenue to be gained from the user base, maybe offering a chargeable opt-out would be fairer.

I never subscribed to Facebook or Instagram for this reason. If you don't pay today, someday they will get money from your work.I only post to Flickr with a Pro account. Recent Yahoo! head management change is look promising by now.

People should probably keep a close eye on who Instagram buys out in the future.

Or rather, if you are worried about what you post in the internet, keep an eye on who buys any posting service that you use, especially if the buyer is Facebook (as in this case) or Google.

Better, accept that any online service that allows you to publish to the internet "for free" (meaning at no up-front cost to you) is likely to end up "monetizing" its service by selling or renting your content. If you consider that monetizing to be a back-door cost to you, avoid such "freebies". Not that for-pay services are necessarily better, but that have a better chance of it, since they have a motivation not to chase away paying customers.

Even better yet, only expose to the internet what you are happy to have shared or used by anyone in any imaginable way, because if people want to, they can and they will.

That may be far easier said than done Eric. Facebook is the current business vemnture of BastardsIncorporatded.

Cheers,

W

In the words of The Eagles:

Last thing I remember, I was Running for the door I had to find the passage back To the place I was before "Relax, " said the night man, "We are programmed to receive. You can check-out any time you like, But you can never leave!"